Much has been made in the past few years, and in particular, this election cycle, about the virility and amount of attacks launched on canidates characters. Each year, the attacks only get worse and worse. From both sides of the aisle and within the parties, even those of the same political affiliation shamelessly attack each other. When pressed, the aggresors will always say they are pointing to flaws in character that are unaceptable for civil servants.

Instead of putting forth real ideas, they launch political attacks, and even when someone does have an idea, it is usually acompanied by a jab at someone else. “Here is my solution, unlike my opponent.”

It needs to end, but cant it?

After all, character is one of the most important factors to voters in determening who to vote for. Consider that President Obama’s biggest advantage last election was that he could make people love him, and that Mitt Romney’s largest flaw is that he can’t. Of course, if you cant make people love you, you can make them hate your opponent.

Some have tried, to a certain extent, to avoid personal attacks. John Mccain was noted for taking a long time to attack then canidate Obama on the topics of Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers, although both would normally be sinking assocations for any canidate.

Some political commentators, generally the conservative leaning ones, say that may have been a key issue in his loss.

In all of this, one has to wonder, what does it say about current politics that some analysts believe the election was decided, not on policy, but on how far someone was willing to go to destroy someones character?

Civility in politics is a dream, but it doesnt have to be. However, it cant be in the current polarized enviorment. So to realize this dream, we need to change the enviorment. To do that, we need to find the cause of the polarization. Through repeated elections, we have seen the rise of the extreme in the house and senate. The pendulem of power swings from one party to the other every so many years, but with each swing it gains strength. In part, this is caused by gerrymandering, a process through which those currently elected redraw the voting districts to give themselves the advantage. But the other part is much closer to home, because it is us, the voters.

Increasingly, even dinner table conversations have become hostile in the area of politics. We, as a nation, have dug into our current political beleifs and refuse to budge. And because our government reflects the wants and needs of the people, it too has become more polarized.

But people are not just born conservative or liberal, nor are they normally born bellicose and stubborn. We are born with, and taught in childhood, to be empathetic, polite, and listen. So what happened? How did our views on each and every issue begin to radically differ from each other?

This polarization is driven by something, and that something is easy to discern. The media has polarized the public, which has polarized the politicians, who have creared the ammunition for the media to repeat the cycle once again.

Much as FOX and MSNBC would have you believe they are fair, they are not. As much as they would like you to believe the other are demons, they are not. For their efforts, they are made rich, and assured constant business. The news is not real reporting anymore, mearly analysis of the latest political scandal. How what each person said, how they said it, and who they said it too will affect their chances in Novemeber.

It is like high school all over again, except with your money, freedom, and safety at stake.

How can anyone meet eye-to-eye when they believe the other is misinformed, or worse, spining the truth? We dont need fair and balanced, or the place for politics, we need what actually hapened, if it actually matters. Fair and balanced is being unbiased and being the place for politics means actually telling what is their without analysis.

But this dream is not impossible, despite how it may seem. These news stations are businesses, and they will respond to what there audiences want. Vote with your remote, and watch only the most pure news reporting they have, instead of their analysis shows.

Once we have civility in politics, we can have true discourse and real solutions. Just imagine what that would be like, and how prosperous we could become.

There are three games that I credit with having evolved by concept of what an rpg should be, the first being The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind by Bethesda Softworks, the second and third however, both go to Bioware and the Dragon Age series, and for good reason.

Dragon Age I introduced us to a radical, and radically simple concept: Your choices make a difference. Sure, there were games before this were your choices influenced the game, but Dragon Age I was unique in that every choice would resound throughout the game. For example, a relatively minor choice you made in the first thirty minutes, should you have decided to choose the mage background, will become important later in the game and can radically change your playthrough. I wont give details and spoil it for anyone who as yet to play, but in essence this kind of pattern exists throughout the game, you can decide how you play all the way to the end.

While Dragon Age I was almost purely based on choice, Dragon Age II felt much more linear. Mostly because it was, it really felt as if it was lacking what made me love Dragon Age in the first place. However, Dragon Age II stands out for some of its own innovative additions, and it isnt as if choice is wholly absent, it is just that you will never make a decsion that will reverberate in the game quite like the choices in Dragon Age I.

On the topic of its innovations, DA2 had a much more streamlined combat system than its predeccesor, especially for those of us who love magic. It really reduced the robotic look to using staff magic, and it was a major improvement in how the action played out. In fact, magic was almost totally overhauled between I & II, and all for the better. Mages now actually fought, and looked cool doing it, as opposed to sitting back and making vauge motions.

Other outstanding features included a vocal main character, as opposed to the silent one in DA1. It might seem like a minor thing, but both the male and female voices are well done, and since you can choose Hawkes personality and responses in speech you can look forward to a game filled with dialogue to match the character you have created, and that is a real bonus. But the real inovation is in the face, you get to model it yourself, of course, in true Dragon Age style, and you can make it into whatever you want. But no matter what you do, it will still be exspressive. Imagine, that peoples faces actually reflect their emotions and that the lips synch with what they are saying! It really raised the bar when it came to character models and character speech.

Of course, the best thing about DA2 is that your choices from the first Dragon Age affect it and are present in it. Allistair cant appear to talk to you if he dies after all, and you made that choice a while back, and now you get to live with the consequences, awesomely.

But for all of my love for DA and DA2, they both had some problems, and while great games, were just a little shy of amazing.

Dragon Age III, if the hints Bioware has handed to us mean anything, will be taking place in Orlais, but just what the plot and events will be are anyones guess. Or rather, anyones choice. In essence, Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age II have created the world and set the stage, and all your choices could be reflected in the third installment of this series. Did you side with the elves in Dragon Age: Origins? Did you duel the Arishok in Dragon Age II? When you begin Dragon Age 2 you are prompted to choose a save file from Origins to use as history, only there is more data in the save file than is used for the gameplay of Dragon Age II, so it seems likely that information will be passed on to three. Because of this, Dragon Age III is guranteed to be at least interesting. But why stop there?

Dragon Age I and II both had problems, in opposite directions. Origins had less-than-exemplar combat, paired with sometimes a little shody character models, and somewhat suffered for its lack of a linear feeling. Not that I particularly like linear rpgs, but I remember that if it wasnt for my penchant of checking every door to see if I could enter I might not have discovered the way to continue one part of the main storyline, and nothing is worse than spending hours of your time trying to figure out what the game wants you to do next.

Dragon Age II suffered from other maladies. The most noticable, and infuriating, was that they reused maps. Every single dungeon looked precisely like every other one, the only difference being which path was blocked and the occasional mirroring of the place. It really was painful to be disapointed repeatedly by the lack creativity in that department. Also, as I metioned before, the game is much more linear. Little you do has a huge affect on the storyline, just on how you do it. Hand in hand with this is that persuasion is no longer as important, and that was almost depressing. Looking back at Origins, my character was practically the definition of sociopath, I manipulated anyone and everyone, wheedled every last coin, bit of information, and service out of every person I came into contact with, and made them love me for it. I took great pride in betraying people at the last momment, before taking them for everything they had. It was fascinating, and was a truly important tool in my aresnal, not to mention a fascinating one. Dragon Age II clipped my wings, so to speak, but there were still some fun oppurtunities so it wasnt a total loss.

So what too look for In Dragon Age III? Synthesis. The best of both worlds. Bioware has a good track record of listening to what their fans are saying, so it is a good bet that words like these ones have made it to their ears.

On the other hand, my expectaions are higher than my hopes. I am expecting that this game lands a perfect 10 at IGN, because with two great games under their belt, and the fact that they both excelled in different areas that the other was poor at, the solotion seems obvious. I am expecting that my choices all the way from the first Dragon Age will help form the world and the ones from the second as well, and I am expecting that this game will be finally introduce the idea that how I build my character will affect how people react. (It really is funny to watch my character, a blood mage, berate another character for using blood magic or give lectures on how blood mages give mages a bad name after I killed my through tons of people using that same magic.)

Honestly though, I hope Bioware doesnt screw this up. While it isnt like the gaming giant is prone to that kind of thing, in such a complex game, one that will be affected by choices you made years ago (or days if like me you will be starting both Origins and DA2 over to make the perfect background for DA3.) and just choosing what choices should be important enough to carry and how to build such a multifaceted storyline is a challenge by itself. Games are often compared to Icarus, and for good reason. Consider the hype that surrounds it already, can it really live up to the potential we saw in Origins and II? Rarely have I seen a game series with as much raw potential as this one has, and I expect them to shine. Realistically, I hope they dont mess it up, but I know it will be a great game no matter what.

We all know that video games are exspensive. Setting aside the intial sixty dollar investment, many games require “online passes,” or have Downloadable Content (DLC) that while not neccesairly required, often “fills” intentional holes left in the story or features.

All in all, you might end up paying $100 for your gaming experience, or more. On the other hand, the quality of games are improving, right? Well, maybe. Some games are better than others, and if you are going to be spending $100 of your hard earned money, it should be fantastic, not merely good. Some of the games listed here are series or collections by the way, but remember that a good series is always a safe bet, and that collections are some of the best you can get for your money. So here we go:

10. The Civilization Series by Sid Meier

The Civilization series is one of the best PC game series out there. You play as one of the various cultures of the world, Spanish, French, or even Iriquois, and your goal is domination. You can conquer with an epic military, or culture, or trade, or really whatever you want. Even if you go back to Civilization III and play it today, you wont be disapointed, but the newest out is loaded with features, including an awesome multiplayer that will keep you coming back for more. Not to metion that a single, single player game can take over ten hours. This game will suck up your time like nothing else.

9.Rainbow Six Vegas II

Available for both PS3 and Xbox360, RSV2 is a fantastic game for those who enjoy stealth/action games. No add-ons required and has both online and local multiplayer, which is a definate plus. The game places you in the shoes of Bishop, an anti-terrorist agent, and sends you all over as you face bomb threats and terrorist acts. With a amazing arsenal of customizable weapons, armor, and camoflauge, not to mention a a plethora of quick action maps with a couple of different game settings, combines with local and online multiplayer, and you are set for a good long time.

8. Castle Crashers

Castle Crashers is a downloadable game over the PSN and Xbox Live that will keep you up at night playing it. You are a knight, and your goal is to rescue four princesses. Easy right? Wrong, as the games takes you all over a map in ridiculous side scrolling action. the grahpics are fantastic and the game never has a dull momment, with up to four players in local and online multiplayer, and no split screen to deal with. Not mention tons of knights to play with, each with their own unique powers. And when you beat the game, it is not nearly the end. You get to tackle insane mode, and if you thought this game was easy, prepare to be rudely disabused of that notion. The action takes place on an entirely new plane once you go insane. And all that doesnt even cover the pets and weapons that you can get.

Did I mention that in multiplayer after rescue a princess the knights fight for the honor of who gets to kiss her?

7. The God of War Collection

Do you like mindless action and bloodlust? If no, skip ahead to number six, if yes, well look no further. Collections are great because you are getting multiple games and at price less than a newer one. If you like action, and havent played the first God of War, it is a shame. Because Kratos, the character you play as, on a quest to kill a god, grinds his way through more enemies than you can shake a stick at. And in a uniquely brutal fashion. Honestly, you cant go wrong with a collection of some of the best-selling games ever to hit the PS2.

6. Infamous

Alright, so the sequel is out already, and that is pretty good too in terms of bang for your buck. But because the sequel is already out, the original is even less exspensive, and you are more likely to get a deal. Infamous drops you in a city that has been ripped apart by an unknown cataclysm, than struck by plauges and disease. Quaratined from the outside world, the city is controlled by gangs, and the people have nowhere to turn to. Except you, for some unknown reason you have gained superpowers from the intial blast, you have control over electricty and magnatism, with all the fun that entails. Not to mention a whole city to explore, think of it like Assassins Creed with superpowers, and you get the idea. Plus, those powers are customizable and upgradeable. And your actions, good or evil, determine how they are used. Lots of action + lots of adventure + couple of choices + superpowers = fun.

5. The Rachet and Clank series

It is worth noting that both number five and number four go to Rachet and Clank, and for good reason. Each and every Rachet and Clank has been better than the last, and the very first one on the PS2 is one of the best games ever made, so it is fair to say that this series has high expectations and exceeds them every time. How can you go wrong with tons of fantasitc weapons and tons of enemies to use them on? Plus it is fun for any age group, and the latest one out All4One, is designed for four people to play the main story line, which is unheard of in gaming. Of course, it is still playable on single player, so dont worry if you are a loner. I have played through every Rachet and Clank game at least three times, sometimes more along the lines of ten times, you simply cant go wrong.

4. The Rachet and Clank Collection

Ok, ok. So at the time of this post, it has not been officially released. But come one, before R&C Tools of Destruction came out as the first PS3 R&C game, there were FOUR games released for the PS2, Rachet and Clank, Rachet and Clank: Going Commando, Rachet and Clank: Up Your Arsenal, and Rachet: Deadlocked. Each and every one was an awesome game by itself, the last two, Up your Arsenal and Deadlocked are, as far as I am concerned, the two best games in a series of absolutely fantastic games. We are talking hundreds of hours of playtime here, and if the price tag is $100, then that is only $25 a game, and each has been remasterd for the PS3 graphics. What more could you want?

3. Deus Ex: Human Revolution

The top three games on this list really deserve their titles. We are talking about games that are so well produced, that the asking price of $60 seems cheap. Games that are like Icarus, only that they fly higher and when the wings melt they turn it into an olympic dive with more twists and turns than any gold medaltist could hope for.

Entering into that arena is Deus Ex: Human Revolution. IGN describes the hype for this game like icarus as well, wondering if they would fly to close to the sun of expectation and crash and burn. Only that they didnt fall, but flew on taking all the heat and delivering only the best.

Set in the year 2027, humans now have the abillity to augement themselves with mechanical parts. You are Adam Jennsen, the Head of Secruity for the biotech corporation Sarrif Industries, and the game begins the day before your company is set to announce a major discovery to the world.

Then, an unkown force breaks in, kills the sceintists and nearly kills Adam. Adam goes into surgery almost dead, and leaves with more circuts and features than anything you have ever seen to embark on a gripping tale of conspiracy and ethics, of advancement and humanity, and of duty and determenation. Action and adventure lurks in every corner, and you are fully customizable to become the ultimate tank, who takes and dishes out damage like nobodies business, or a sneak who can turn invisible and specializes in close quarters kills and submissions, or even a tech head who uses an enemies turrets, cameras, and robots against them.

No matter which you choose you will gain experience, and there is always multiple ways to accomplsih your goal.

And on that note, Deus Ex boasts something unheard of in modern action games. You dont have to kill anyone. Yes, you read that right. You dont have to kill a single person, alternatively you could kill them all of course, but you are never forced to kill. (with the exception of three boss fights.) and there is a trophy for completing the game without killing a soul.

This game has it all: action, adventure, choice, and consequence. You have to have it, and it is worth every penny you spend.

2. The Dragon Age series

Playing these games raised the bar in my mind for all other games, afterwards, I expected that peoples faces should look real both in cutscenes and out. That when a person has an emotion, it should show. That when I make a choice, there will be consequences for it and that those consequences will not only shape the world in ways that I might not be able to forsee, but the games I play afterwards too.

These games are all about choice and consequence, and every choice you make is important. They are beautiful and boast people with actual expressions. The action and story are equally amazing, espcially since your choices dictate the course of both.

Honestly, I do not have the words to describe how awesome these games are. They are simply some of the best, and if you dont have them, you are missing out.

1. The Elder Scrolls series

Many years ago, I stumbled across a game called Morrowind, and I have never been the same since. They are like no other game out there, as they have more choices and openeness than any other game before or since. I still play Morrowind today, because on the PC they can be modded by anyone exstensively and for free.

Truly there is no limit to these games, and that is why they are on top. Simply search for mods online and you will find libraries of them, a limitless supply of modifications to improve your game. And the games are practically perfect without these improvements!

Like Dragon Age, words are not enough to describe these games. Try them, you wont regret it.

And that is everything, the top 10 games, or series for your dollar. Each and every one is good, and packed with more content than you might even be able to get through, and worth every cent you put down for it.

I must admit, I went into this game with high expectations, and why shouldn’t I have? Aside from all the hype surrounding the game, it had a star studded cast, including my all time favorite author R. A. Salvatore and the lead designer for the amazing games Morrowind and Oblivion. It was promised to have found a way to merge action and rpg, fixing the terminal problems of both. The lack of story, holes in the story, in action style games. And the weakness of combat in rpg styles (particularly western style rpg’s).

To say I was disapointed is an understatement. The story starts interestingly enough, your character, which you construct in a funny maner in the introductory cutscense wakes up on a pile of corpses, the only success in a series of otherwise failed experiments. The action starts soon after, as your enemies, introudced as the Tuatha, attack for unkown reasons and you are forced to defend the facility with sword and magic.

Initially, I was impressed by the fighting system. It lacked the choppy feal of the Elder Scrolls series. and the graphics and actions were beautifuly choreograhphed. The shift from magic, to sword, to dagger was almost seamless, allowing me to shift my fighting style as soon as the mood hit me, and usually not requiring using the menu. Even in the begining, I was never forced to adopt a particular style. All the usual rpg classes were introduced, daggers and bows for the stealth/ranger, swords and hammers for the warrior, and staves and spells for the mage, and it seemed, for the momment, that this game truly was a synthesis of choice and action.

That illusion was quickly dispelled as the game went on. There were almost no improvements or additons to the combat past the intial point, only a few more weapons were introduced, and I soon realized that I had almost no real choice at all. My standard test for my abillity to choose in a game goes like this: Can I join my enemies and reak mayhem and destruction? If yes, than that game is generally one with lots of choices that can affect the outcome in different ways, if no, then it probabbly isnt.

That said, I did not enter the game banking on that abillity. I expected something along the lines of Dragon Age, where my choices would affect actual events, even important ones. For example, if I have two objectives that can be pursued, but I have to do one before the other, I would want there to be consequences for it. I would want the abillity to choose to right or wrong, or some stranger gray area that perhaps previous actions unlocked.

However, I was sorely disapointed. I realized that almost none of your choices have any affect at all. If I go wild and kill an entire city of people, I will get a bounty and guards will chase me. But nothing else will be much affected, if I leave a sick village alone and dont help it, it wont die off.

My last hope for choice was in how I customised my character. With the abillity to invest in three branches of skills and never being forced to choose one over the other, I thought I could customize my character into the perfect mage-assassain, but more than that, that there would be choices within each tree that would dictate what kind of magic I would have, and what kind of stealth user I would be.

Alas, but it was not the case. You can choose to be whatever you want, but within each tree you are practically required to obtain everything in order to meet the requirements for the next level of skills and improvements. I could not focus on daggers and sneaking in stealth, or focus on summoing and offensive spells in magic. I was forced to get a little of everything in order to proceed.

In the end, this game is not as bad as I make it out to be. It was good, but simply not as great as it could or should have been. In the end I felt as though I had more choice in Assassain’s Creed and Deus Ex, and better action besides.

Graphics: 9

Absolutely stunning too look at, without a single detail overlooked. With the exception of people, who looked a little stupid in the faces, and after Dragon Age, there is simply no exscuse to have stunning landscapes and ugly people.

Sound: 7

It was okay, but I never really noticed it.

Gameplay: 6

Don’t promise what you can’t deliver. This game promised choice, the abillity to change the games future and how you played it at will and in many different ways. It promised a fighting system to rival action games. It promised a good story and an in depth and detailed society. Thank you R. A. Salvatore for being the one to come up with the story and legends that are found in the game, at least you did your job right.

Overall: 6

When I get the feeling that Assassain’s Creed gives me more choices and action, and mind you that I am talking about Assassains Creed I, than an wrpg touted as giving the best of both, something has gone horribly wrong. The game is good, but many games are decidedly better. Beauty and story are not replacements for gameplay, and trust me when I say that I did not even cover the half of my problems with this game. (Don’t even get me started on the problems with stealth.)

Let me begin by saying that this is merely theory on my end and, moreover, I am not in a posistion to attempt to prove or disprove my hypothesis. However, our current understanding of physics leads to certain conclusions about the nature of space and its structure. It is easy to say that current understanding is flawed, as we still come out blank with answers for gravity and magnetism. Two easily observable phemonena that we are at a loss to explain.

Perhaps one of the most difficult things to explain is how these forces operate through vacuum, how gravity and magnetism can work without any noticable interaction between the two pieces of matter. It is most difficult to explain because it defies our very conception of logic, since it should be impossible for two objects which cannot interact directly or indirectly to affect the other.

The key to overcoming this problem is to examine our basic perceptions. Schools, from elementary to high school, teach that we, and indeed all objects, are mostly empty space. That, if not for the inherrent repellent force of atoms, we could move through other objects without any of our molecules touching theirs.

But what if there was not empty space in between our molecules? Like bacteria before the invention of the microscope, what we perceive as nothing might simply be incredibly small.

I will get back to that point in a momment, but before I continue, let us examine the atom. An atom, unlike what the ancient greeks believed, is not the smallest unit of matter. It is the smallest unit of matter with the unique properties of the element it represents, but we can still break down the atom into protons, neutrons, and electrons. With the advent of atom smashers, we can now peer even smaller, and oberve quarks. We have even classifed them, up quarks, down quarks, etc.

But are they the only quarks in existence? It would seem logical to assume that anti-matter consits of a different variety, although it might simply be a different configuration leading to a completely different formation. How would we know if they werent in an atom? Since our only method of observation is to smash atoms together, other varieties of quarks may exist as free standing entities.

Combining these two thoughts, 1) that it makes no logical sense for there to vacuum between to obviously interacting objects, and 2) that there may be more quarks than what have currently identified, we come to my current hypothesis: That gravity and magnetism are products of quarks that do not make atoms.

It is my hypothesis that some quarks are “damaged,” almost like a half-melted lego brick, and so are unable to truly form molecules as we know them. However, they still retain some of their properties and attempt to connect with other quarks around them. This connection is the basis for interaction between molecules.

The higher the mass of an atom or molecule, the more area it has for these conections, and thus, more gravity or magnetism.

It is observing these quarks, (if they are quarks, instead of even smaller particles that are yet undiscoverd) that is the problem. Since they are theoretically everywhere, it would be hard to zero an instrument to detect them. And it would be even more difficult to tell if you truly had discovered them or had just received some form of interference because to some extent these particles would have properties we have already asigned to larger molecules.

On the other hand, should these molecules exist, they would possess fantastic potential. Specifically, the manipulation of gravity. Asumming that the particls are not uniform, and are actually “junk quarks,” it would seem likely that some would be better at “sticking” to other quarks than their fellows, and that some might be almost completely unresponsive. In theory, by manipulation the quark content around atoms, one could effectively increase or decrease gravity, or move its point of origin.

Whether or not we could ever be capable of manipulating quarks on that level is a different matter altogther though.

The members first met in kindergarten and were classmates throughout their primary and secondary education. Bump of Chicken’s first performance was in 1994, during their ninth grade cultural festival, playing a cover of The Beatles’ version of Twist and Shout. In 1996, their song, Danny, won an award on 96TFM.

In 1999, Bump of Chicken released their first album, Flame Vein, on High Line Records. Later that year, they released their first single, “Lamp”. In 2000, they released The Living Dead, their final release on High Line.They also held their first live tour, “Tsuaa Pokiiru (ツアーポキール?)”, during March and April.

Later in 2000, the group switched to Toy’s Factory, releasing their first single on the label, “Diamond”, in September. Bump of Chicken’s first big success occurred when their single, “Tentai Kansoku”, appeared on the Oricon Weekly Charts in 2001. They held two live tours, “Star Porking Tours (スターポーキングツアーズ Sutaa Pookingu Tsuaazu?) 2001″ beginning in March and “Surf Porkin'” beginning in July. In October, they released “Harujion”.

They released their first album on Toy’s Factory, Jupiter, in February 2002 and was their first number one on the Oricon Weekly Charts. In the summer of 2002, their music was featured on the Japanese TV drama, “Tentai Kansoku”, giving them more exposure. At the end of 2002, the group released the single “Snow Smile”. 2003 saw the release of the double A-side single “Lost Man/sailing day”. “Sailing Day” was used as the ending theme to the animated movie, One Piece: Dead End Adventure”.

The beginning of 2004 saw a slew of re-releases. “Arue”, from their album Flame Vein, was released as a single in March. They re-released their first two albums in April. Flame Vein received an extra song and was re-released as Flame Vein +1. The Living Dead received no modifications. In July, the group released “Only Lonely Glory”, which became their first single to chart at number one on the Oricon Weekly Charts. A month later, they released their fourth album, Yggdrasil, which was their second album to reach number one on the Oricon Weekly Charts. Shortly after, they released “Sharin no Uta”, from Yggdrasil, as a single.

In 2005, Bump of Chicken released two singles, “Planetarium” and “Supernova/Karma”. Karma was used as the theme song for Namco’s “Tales of the Abyss. The band’s next single, “Namida no Furusato” was used in a commercial for Lotte Airs. It became the group’s second number one single. In 2007, they released the singles “Hana no Na” and “Mayday” on the same day. The two singles reached number one and two respectively on the Oricon Weekly Charts. Bump of Chicken released their second latest album, Orbital Period, on December 19, 2007. Their latest album is “present from you”, released on June 18, 2008. This album is a compilation of b-sides and other non-album tracks.

They will release double A-side single “R.I.P./Merry Christmas” on November 25, 2009, becoming their first single in two years.

Motoo Fujiwara （藤原基央）

Motoo Fujiwara is the composer, lyricist, guitar, and main vocalist of the group, also acting as the leader of the band. He has written most of the music, and has also drawn the artwork for their albums ‘The Living Dead’ and ‘Yggdrasil’. He was born April 12, 1979 with blood type O. He enjoys doing laundry, cannot eat spicy foods, has poor eyesight, likes to eat chicken, and enjoys playing the harmonica. In March 2006, he released a solo album titled “Song for Tales of the Abyss,” which included “Karma” and instrumental versions of songs from the game Tales of the Abyss. Uses Gibson 1960 Les Paul Special Single Cutaway, Sonic fender, Gibson J-45.

Hiroaki Masukawa （増川弘明）

Hiroaki Masukawa is the guitarist of the group, and also writes most of the hidden joke tracks for albums. He was born December 20, 1979 with blood type A, and is left-handed. He is referred to as the shy member of the group, and calls himself pessimistic. His hobbies are largely anime and games. His nicknames within the band are “Hiro,” “Hose,” (meaning “very thin”), and “Nikke”. Uses Gibson Les Paul Standard, Fender Stratocaster.

Yoshifumi Naoi （直井由文）

Yoshifumi Naoi is the bassist of the group, and is referred to as the “crowd pleaser”. He was born October 9, 1979 with blood type A, and jokes that he “falls ill exactly four times a year.” He also calls himself an anime and game otaku, and a “rare genius”. His hobbies are photography and drawing; he has released an artbook containing his works, and helped with some of the album artwork. His nickname within the band is “Chama,” a play on the Japanese phrase “Obotchama” referring to a rich family’s son. Uses Sonic Bass, Fender Jazz Bass 65.

Hideo Masu （升秀夫）

Hideo Masu is the drummer for the band. He was born August 10, 1979 with blood type A, and describes himself as an introvert. He also mentions that he has good eyesight, cannot write kanji well, likes to go outdoors, and often gets headaches. Uses Canopus Maple Shell.

Shocking Lemon

Shocking Lemon first formed in 1996. In 1999, they released their maxi-single Pastel Room and went on a tour named after the single later that year. The next year, Shocking Lemon switched to Alinosrecords and released their second mini-album. Since then, the band has continued to release more music and is now working with One-Coin Records. They also got the chance to do the opening for the anime Hajime no Ippo.

Ass Baboons of Venus

The Ass Baboons of Venus are a duo that combines the innocent cuteness of Japanese pop with the ridiculous toilet humor of Los Angeles trash rock. Comprised of comedian Naoko Nozawa and punk rocker Bob Limp, they tend to cross the boundaries between new wave and twee pop with their humorous sound. After releasing several singles, the Phucket a la Bum Bum compilation was released in the summer of 2002. ~ Bradley Torreano, All Music Guide

Green Milk form the Planet Oarnge

Green Milk From the Planet Orange formed in Tokyo, Japan, in July 2001. Combining prog rock, psychedelia, jazz, and indie rock, the band was formed after the breakup of No Rest for the Dead. The bandmembers are known by the monikers of Benjian (bass), A (drums and vocals), and Dead K (guitar and vocals). The band lists Miles Davis, Sonic Youth, Soft Machine, My Bloody Valentine, and Tortoise as influences. ~ Stephen Cramer, All Music Guide